World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman's view of Afghnistan differs significantly from New York Times correspondent Filkins understanding from years of reporting going back about a decade. Filkins sees the complexities of Pastun country inside Afghnistan and Pakistan and the military and ISI's involvement, and other correspondents have pointed to the narcotics trade and corruption. Kerry's simplistic view is that the Taliban do not enjoy much support, when actually Americans are seen on the ground as foreign occupiers. These correspondents in the field point to this as an everpresent danger, which would tilt support to those fighting foreigners, with nationalist and Muslim sentiment prevailing over everything else. And Kerry appears to be too willing to dismiss allegations of narcotics involvement of the Karzai administration with the "show me" comment. For critics of the Bush administration this is simply astounding, when so much is at stake. Does patient mean digging in one's heels slowly? But that is how the Vietnam intervention ran into trouble, without public sentiment in support of the plans....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The problem of information providers is linked to the problem of the recipient of the information- the common man in America. For the common man in America these are distant places with strange cultures and manners of living, remote from his everyday existence in an industrialized country. Why should the common man in America care if a small fraction of GNP and a trained military with advanced equipment will be sufficient to deal with situations in remote places. A fast growing economy between 1950- 2000 could also absorb the costs of local conflicts. The reason the common man in America should care is that the economy is expected to grow slowly, so that poor information leading to poor decisions on allocating limited and declining resources for different local conflicts- a war in Iraq costing 1 trillion dollars, and a war in Afghanistan 1 trillion dollars- can compromise future economic security, investment in America and overall defense needs. Especially when money wasted with poor decisions cannot be retrieved or put back in the Treasury, and creates future problems....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chuck Hagel on the need to bring in more countries to handle difficult situations such as the one the US faces in Iraq and Afghanistan. He says thats why the world now has a G20 and not a G8. No country can face these situations alone especially when there is a mutual interest of many countries in these situations. He calls it a 20th century reaction to 21st century realities. He says the 2 wars cost more than a trillion dollars. One sees a new respect for international institutions such as the UN, World Bank, IMF, and GATT renamed WTO, even with Republicans. Chuck Hagel's point makes a lot of sense and is generally accepted in people's understanding of the situation from the Defence Department to the Administration, and among respected politicians. It is putting it onto practice that is the hard part. As Hagel puts it, it is important to remember what Lyndon Johnson told Senatior Russell, that he knew the Vietnam war could not be won, and yet he did not want to pull out and be the first American President to lose a war. This is a contradiction because if it can't be won its going to be lost under the next President or the one after that, in this case Gerald Ford. Hagel says it not ours to win and lose. Here he points to the interconnectedness and shared interests of all nations. Every great threat to the U.S., whether it is economic, terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation, health pandemics, environmental degradation, energy or water and food shortages, is also a threat to global partners ansd rivals. So its wrong to view engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan through the lens that says its about winning or losing. And he asks win what? Too many cultural, ethnic and religious dynamics are involved for any one nation to control. Hagel concludes by saying that the US, the Defense Department, the Obama administration, must get this right, as it affects the global architecture for the next generation. Fresh thinking is needed. Single issue engagement is obsolete in the 21st century in dealing with global partners or rivals, or countries with aspects of both....
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points out (in this cover issue on India-Pakistan relations) several fundamental facts. The first is that the current state of relations betweeen India and Pakistan hurts Pakistan the most. It makes a much smaller country and smaller economy bear the burden of defense against a large neighbor- defense takes up much needed allocation of funds for infrastructure and development, education and healthcare. It also weakens democratic institutions and their development by an overdependence on the military for governance. Poor India-Pakistan relations have significant adverse effects on the U.S. In fighting the Taliban U.S. forces are fighting a force that Pakistan's military helped create and support from its early beginnings as a way to counter Indian influence. With an Indian-Pakistani peace settlement of issues in Kashmir and other outstanding issues the U.S. would be in a significantly better position to disengage from the region, especially when the entire Middle East is moving in a new direction in 2011. Consider the difficulties in establishing peace in Northern Ireland, and between Turkey and Greece, and the difficulties of establishing peace between India and Pakistan cannot be considered even more difficult. Pakistan and India muddle along- neither side is doing much to take the initiative. For the U.S. disengagement from South Asia can be best achieved by pushing for a settlement between the two countries. Pakistan and India have much to gain from a settlement. Considering the progress made in Ireland, such places as Yugoslavia, and in Turkish-Greek relations, there is a lot more that can be done and should be done to bring India and Pakistan together. In Ireland diplomatic efforts were made by U.S. envoy George Mitchell, and in Yugoslavia U.S. envoy Holbrooke made diplomatic efforts towards the Dayton accords. Greek-Turkish relations have advanced to the point where Erdogan and Papandreou, the Greek and Turkish prime ministers, discuss solutions to the Greek debt crisis. This includes options to reduce Greece's defense expenditures in the light of Turkey's new foreign policies. The lack of such efforts to break the deadlock between India and Pakistan by the U.S,. the U.K. and other countries involved in the NATO mission in Afghanistan, the emphasis on a military solution supported first by Gen. McChrystal, and then by by Gen. Petraeus, all show a lack of understanding of the real issues that need to be tackled- issues relating to a peace settlement between India and Pakistan....
The New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, the commander in Afghanistan, General McChrystal, responds to a question about Vice President Biden, and says, "who is that?" An aide jumps in saying, is that "Bite Me?" These and other words of disdain for the Vice President and other policy advisors, are seen as the kind of frustration facing commanders from the slow progress in the enlarged effort in Afghanistan. It also brings to the fore the serious questions that have always remained, some raised by Biden, Reidel and others, of how any kind of success could be achieved without a reliable partner in the Afghan government, with the complicated situation in Pakistan where the Intelligence Services pursued a different agenda from that of the government, and with little interest from the people in the rural areas in a vast rural mountainous country, Kabul a little urban dot in a huge landscape of deserts and mountains. See the groups and links for Afghanistan and Pakistan for background.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With Obama's popularity rating in 2016 similar to Reagan's in his last year in office at 51%, he announced his endorsement of Hillary Clinton for president. Obama is likely to campaign in 2016 for Hillary to reunite the Democratic Party, bring Bernie Sanders and Sander's supporters behind the Democratic nominee, including younger women.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
General McChrystal lacks support from Senators who backed him earlier, after comments in a Rolling Stone article showed disdain for the Obama policy team and for Vice President Biden.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ reporters tell the story of Chuck Hagel of Nebraska from his early days in Vietnam, a cellphone business venture, Senator during the Iraq war, gradual shift to opposing the Iraq war, serving on the Senate Foreign Relations Commitee with Senator Obama, and the bond established with Obama over American involvement in the Middle East.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chuck Hagel answers questions in the U.S. Senate about his views on the Iraq and Afghanistan surge, on sanctions against Iran, and nuclear disarmament. Hagel says the U.S. must engage not retreat in the world, and discussed his world view without getting drawn into details about policy issues. He faces a difficult nomination for U.S. Defense Secretary with skepticism from Republicans. Hagel opposed both surges and says the right approach is bilateral disarmament for nuclear weapons.
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Lt. Gen John Kelly loses his son Robert in Afghanistan and talks about the immense burdens facing military families. Robert is out on patrol duty in a mine filled area of Afghanistan's Sangin district. Only 1% of the population serves in the military. And Kelly says his is only one of 5500 American families that have lost a child in this war. There is a sense among military families that the war and these military families have been forgotten. One Marine Corps general wrote to Kelly that service to and sacrifice for the country has become a legacy affair for a small number of military families. Before the midterm Congressional elections only 2% of the people rated Afghanistan as a top issue and hardly any candidates mentioned this issue. Tom Brokaw, a well known anchor of NBC News, wrote in a major daily that the war and the sacrifices have been forgotten in the election and hardly discussed. Adm. Mike Mullen went so far as to say that he worries that we could wake up one day and that the American people will no longer know us and we won't know them....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
An inherent division between the two sides about the merits of a large scale involvement- as advocated by a tactical military man McChrystal and the limited involvement advocated by Vice President Biden considering the lack of a reliable Afghan partner - have now spilled out into the open after a compromise was patched together about a year ago. That compromise involved sending more troops but with a deadline for withdrawal set for July 2011. Now as the war reaches a stalemate -as a war of this type in the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan, and as ordinary Afghans see no particular interest in either side in this war, was largely expected to turn out into- the frustration has spilled out into the open. General McChrystal, in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine this Spring, made comments with disdain for Vice President Biden, and an aide to McChrystal called National Security Advisor James Jones , a clown.

What Holbrooke Knew

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the ideas of Richard Holbrooke that have never been disclosed before on the conflicts in Pakistan and Afghanistan are disclosed by Kristof of the Times. Holbrooke believed the Obama administration's military approach to the conflict would not work. He worked hard to build a diplomatic solution similiar to the Dayton accords that he helped negotiate for the ethnically divided Yugoslavia. He earned the respect of Pakistanis in working for a long term solution to problems in the region.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Defense Secretary Gates does not see Russia as the threat it was in the Cold War, first because Russia's conventional forces are a "shadow" of what they were during the Cold War, and Russia has adverse demographic trends that will diminish Russia's ability in conventional forces. He sees the Georgian war in the context of Russia's seeking to exorcize, as he puts it, past humiliations. And Gates sees opportunities in the relationship with Russia. Such things as Russia's willingness to work with the US on Afghanistan. Evidence of this is Russia supporting the renwal of the UN resolution on Afghanistan. Another indication is that Russia he says is very worried about the drugs coming out of Afghanistan, and has been supportive to provide alternative routes for Europeans to get equipment and supplies into Afghanistan. These views come across in an interview on December 17, with Charlie Rose, a five time elected Congressman, for the PBS Charlie Rose show. They are also reflected in an article in Foreign Affairs journal's current issue. Gates was a CIA analyst and has some insightful observations. Gates told Charlie Rose that he does not see the Islamic radicals and violent Islamic extremists as a threat in the same way as the threat in the Cold War years. This threat is not as big as the threat to freedom during the Cold War. He says the failure in strategic communications was huge as agencies of the US government engaged in activities in other countries, like the Agency for International Development and the US Information Agency, were neglected starting in the in the 1990's. Communications in other countries of what the US represented and stands for was left to the Pentagon, a role the Pentagon was ill-suited for. He sees the Islamic terrorism as more of an ideological conflict. Speaking at a town hall meeting at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, in December, Gates pointed to these communications failures as a real challenge for the new administration. But he now sees a huge opportunity in this past failure, and ways of addressing it creatively, in addition to commiting resources and people to this effort. Walter Pincus wrote this article, and its part of the fineprint analysis effort at the Washington Post in which speeches, reports, and other documents are examined by people like Pincus, to catch the really important things, uncovering the fine print that really makes the headlines. Another aspect of this fineprint effort is that there are a huge number of reports, and speeches and documents that had a tone reminiscent of the Cold War during the Georgia war and yet they do not correctly reflect the real situation about Russia, as Gates sees it from his analysis of what is actually happening. Gates has used Foreign Affairs, the Dec 17 Charlie Rose Show on PBS in which he was interviewed, and the speech at the Balad Air Force base in Iraq, to communicate his views and analysis. They are important to underline and emphasize precisely because they show that all that cold war hysteria reporting and speeches may be misleading and lead to improper conclusions and mistakes in policy, wasted effort, wasted resources, and lost lives. And just as the US strategic communications was starved of resources and effort, so also this necessary work to retrieve and give emphasis to the important things is neglected. One additional link to this is the speech, discussion, and QA session in Washington DC at the time of the G20 summit in which President Medvedev and the new administration's elder statesman and diplomat Marilyn Albright, former secretary of state, expressed their hopes and plans for a new era in Russian-American relations. ...
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Former Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, has called for fresh thinking in U.S. foreign policy and foreign engagements after the wars in Iran and Afghanistan cost the U.S. about one trillion dollars. He says the U.S. should avoid single issue engagement, get the participation of other countries, and increase common ground on a host of issues which concern most of the major nations in the world. This is why we have a G-20 and not a G-8, says Hagel. This policy also helps the U.S. by having other countries in Europe, Asia and the Middle East take up some of the responsibilities that would otherwise fall disproportionately on the U.S., and lets the U.S. devote attention to strengthening the domestic economy which underpins strength in world affairs. On Iran he sees continuing talks as the better approach to coming up with a solution, for which he has come under criticism from some Republicans.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Public opinion experts in Israel say President Obama's policy in the Middle East is seen by a majority of Israelis as reflecting a sound judgement. Obama's approval ratings in Israel are up 13 percentage points compared to 2010. It is now 54%, according to December opinion polls by Mr. Telhami, a University of Maryland professor who supervised the surveys on Israeli opinion. Only 19% of Israelis now support Israel attacking Iran's nuclear facilities without U.S. support, according to the University of Maryland survey by Mr. Telhami of 500 people, that was annouced last week.

Eat Your Heart Out, Homer

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Adventures of Amir Hamza is a story much like the Odyssey but set in the Persian, Central Asia Islamic world. It was born as far back as the 9th century. It has a South Asian version since the epic is retold in different settings and has a oral tradition of being recited by dastangos who used to recite these myths and legends . Amir Hamza is supposedly the uncle of the prophet Mohammed. Its South Asian version is in the Hamzanama that was commisssioned with painted manuscripts by the Mughal emperor Akbar. It has 1400 illustrations and formed the basis of Mughal art which was a fusion of the artistic worlds of Hindu India and Islamic Persia and Central Asia. In those times the Persian speaking world extended from Tabriz to Hyderabad in south of India and the Hamza Adventures were told around campfires and in the outdoors. The Hamzanama paintings commissioned by Akbar were shown at the Sackler Gallery around the time of the Iraq invasion in the summer of 2002 and show a world long forgotten. The Saudi type of Wahhabi Islam and religious zealotry is a far cry from this more open world of art and legend and life in central, south and western Asia, of commerce, trade and ways of life intermingled and flow of people across a large region in Asia. What it may suggest is that the current wave of religious zealotry is a kind of phase that like a passing wind comes and then is dispersed, maybe its a reaction to western interventions, maybe a failed response of tradition with modernization, maybe something else, a clinging to old outmoded patterns in areas that are most left behind by change, with ethnic and other strife mixed in with it. No single or simple response to it makes sense and a lot of patience is needed. Conflict of civilizations talk and the like may simply be overdone and way oversimplified things....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Landler's interview with Hussain Haqqani in Oct. 2013 provides insights into the misperceptions on both sides of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship since 1947. Particularly the way Pakistan cannot shake free from seeing everything through the prism of India. He points out that Ambassador Holbrooke had a forward looking approach to the South Asian region, but failed to get the support of president Obama and the weak leadership of president Zardari, resulting in a squandered opportunity for the region to look beyond the twentieth century's conflicts towards a brighter future.

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us